In this exercise, we're creating the process (the system is the process). I'm pointing out that establishing "due" is the hard part. We keep defaulting to "quantity of complaints" as if it were a due process, instead of actually establishing due processes. I'm asking all of us, as an industry, as a peer group, to question this default. If it is a slippery slope, we're already caught on it.

Yes, establishing due process is hard, but "X% of respondents complain" has never been a due process (it hurts people when it takes too many complaints to fix the thing [and sometimes with things like harassment and murder One is already too many complaints], and it hurts people when it is easy to get X% from a mob). We need to get out of the mindset that just because computers are great at tabulating quantity and numbers are "objective" that doesn't make that the right process, and certainly doesn't make that the due process.

Absolutely, too, we should include workflow steps like "extra monitoring/background checks" in our processes. Often those get ignored because they likely require people/labor and when designing systems we don't always want to include those elements.